Toshiba's 55" 4K Glasses-Free 3DTV Shipping "First Quarter 2012"

[Rob Anderson]

This is a pretty cool announcement:
http://ces.cnet.com/8301-33379_1-573...012-exclusive/

While details about the prototype were passed around, the release date is closer than we thought. I had the chance to test drive one in an NAB suite and although the proto wasn't ready for the home, it was on the right path.

It's been said numerous times already, but 2012 will absolutely be the year 4k makes a huge splash with consumers, placing RED at the very tip of the sword -- and all of us right there with them. Can't wait to see final details for what the RED RAY will offer.

Thanks to RED for propelling everyone into this era.

[KETCH ROSSi]

Too bad that even so its a 4k Monitor, almost, the 3D mode is at the very bottom of HD @720... :(

So, no thanks.

[Ross Isaacs]

Too bad that even so its a 4k Monitor, almost, the 3D mode is at the very bottom of HD @720... :(

So, no thanks.

Still this is a quantum leap for the 3D television industry as the public should go ape shit over this and 3D will hopefully be embraced by the masses. Win win situation for all who are propagating 3D film making.

[Caden Nash]

Yes, but I still believe 3D is a gimmick. Why is it so popular now than When it was used in the 70's? What because of Avatar?

[Rob Anderson]

Yes, but I still believe 3D is a gimmick. Why is it so popular now than When it was used in the 70's? What because of Avatar?

Have you compared the 3D of even just a few years ago (let alone the 70's) with what you get today? Picture is leaps and bounds ahead of anything that came before. 3D was popular before (hugely popular in fact), but the trend died off when the pictures didn't advance well enough and the quality of the rest of the film (acting and script) dramatically died. Bit of a silly question really -- it's popular now because it is usually being treated as an enhancement to pictures, not a gimmick. And the end product is far improved over predecessors.

[Ross Isaacs]

Have you compared the 3D of even just a few years ago (let alone the 70's) with what you get today? Picture is leaps and bounds ahead of anything that came before. 3D was popular before (hugely popular in fact), but the trend died off when the pictures didn't advance well enough and the quality of the rest of the film (acting and script) dramatically died. Bit of a silly question really -- it's popular now because it is usually being treated as an enhancement to pictures, not a gimmick. And the end product is far improved over predecessors.

2D and 3D will most likely co-exist together giving the audience a choice of being able to watch either formats depending on what content is made available.

[David Collard]

2D and 3D will most likely co-exist together giving the audience a choice of being able to watch either formats depending on what content is made available.

My local cinema is forcing me to watch 3D for just about everything. Tsk Tsk. Guess they'll get my money with a dvd rental.

[Rob Anderson]

2D and 3D will most likely co-exist together giving the audience a choice of being able to watch either formats depending on what content is made available.

Just here in Las Vegas we see 3D done perfect (usually simultaneous running of both 3D and non-3D versions, current-gen projection and glasses tech) and then 3D done very badly (2 generations old 3D, poorly calibrated projections, one format choice). I assume the same is true in most places but the 3D equation has definitely tightened up my choice of theaters. For reference, there are two theaters in town that I will go to (unless indie or foreign feature) and they are; Rave Pictures in Town Square and Red Rock Cinemas at Red Rock Station.

[KETCH ROSSi]

Still this is a quantum leap for the 3D television industry as the public should go ape shit over this and 3D will hopefully be embraced by the masses. Win win situation for all who are propagating 3D film making.

Definitely Ross, but to me image quality is more important then the capacity of been Glasses FREE... ;)

[Sven Seynaeve]

Definitely Ross, but to me image quality is more important then the capacity of been Glasses FREE... ;)

IMHO glasses free is very important for s3d to make it worldwide to the masses. At least the wining seems to go little away day by day about the glasses, and everyone seems to get more used to it.

Did''nt know it would drop the res again to beneith HD standards. Off course resolution is a different discussion with s3d. Allthough it's pretty obvious full frame s3d standards will be better then dropped res.